Happy New Year, though, I still have some faith in humanity, and I'm grateful to be alive. Around this time last year I think I was feeling kid of crummy, I suppose I just get pensive around all this talk of changing and fixing and pulling oneself up from whatever failures one perceives from the previous year. Since this year I have specifically avoided big plans, I am hoping to force myself into a mindset where I can live in and correctly see the present moment. Not that I don't have a whole rigorous plan for changing and fixing and so on. :)

I am going to have to reassess my feelings about the other candidates before the primaries come, and I'm sure I'll find someone else to vote for in the primaries. I'll be taking a look at Dodd's record.

*sigh*. That is a hard one to accept. LF and his mags are slime. I remember stumbling on copies other guys left out when I was in the Navy and going YUCK. I never heard of the ‘barely legal’ thing, but its existence doesn’t really surprise me its another example of ”WTF is wrong with people?”.

Then again it falls back to the old free speech argument doesn’t it. I wouldn’t hold this against DK. Its not like he courted this endorsement. I can’t vote in either of the big party primaries, but I’d vote Deniss_K if he made it.

Sure, free speech and all. But accepting an endorsement from LF and money from him tells me he is blind to issues and concepts I consider key in a leader of the country, and appears to be directly in conflict with what he states as his values. I don't understand a way in which I could not hold this against him.

You may be right on this. I think many issues are a journey and you’re aware of my stance on free will and individual rights. I used to be pro-legalization of all non-victimless crimes and considered prostitution one of these, mainly because I didn’t know anything about it.

Then jet started pointing me towards documents on human trafficking and the abuse that goes on in the trade changing my stance. I now have to know the details/ramifications about anything considered a victimless crime before I blindly tell the government to butt out.

Dennis_K may be like that. I saw your comment below and think an email to him may be appropriate.

Sounds a little bit like you'd like elements of a right-wing moral stance with a left-wing politician. I think you're setting yourself up for disappointment, there. A big tent means a big tent: you're going to be finding yourself under a roof with folks you aren't comfortable with. It's the whole politics and strange bedfellows thing, at the end of the day.

People aren't, and can't, be purely one thing. Larry's an awful person and also a strong voice for First Amendment rights. Drug dealers care about their families. Politicians champion things we care about and make choices we'd rather they not. They're all human, and it's all grey. Hoping for black and white... man, you're just mining for tears.

No, I think I understand something here just fine. You want Larry Flynt to have no voice (whether through a candidate or not). That's the message you're conveying to me, whether or not it's the message you mean to be sending.

We can also discuss why I shouldn't contribute to the campaigns of any candidates you support due to my own positive/consumer stance on porn, if it comes right down to it, because my money and voice would be one that also, coincidentally, supports something you don't.

But I'm pretty sure you wouldn't say that, because you've so far been willing to practice some deliberate ignorance where I'm concerned.

But as a person it's hard not to feel like I'm at least getting spattered by some of the paint from the broad brush you're using to give Kucinich this particular hue.

But, see, you're not running for office. You're my friend. And I treat those things differently. Let's just talk about this in person because you really, really are misinterpreting what I am saying and I am not at all practicing deliberate ignorance where you are concerned, nor any of my other gazillion friends that feel at least somewhat similarly to you. I understand that people I love like things and support things I don't like. But I'm not voting for them for the presidency. Not to mention, I feel that there is a difference between LF & Hustler and various other companies and organizations that are in the adult entertainment business. If you want to back me into a corner and force me to be black and white about it I guess you can probably do that but I'd really prefer not, this is how I keep my sanity.

Also you can contribute to the campaign of whoever you want! I am not trying to stop you! And I still care about you as my friend even though you have the opposite stance! In case I wasn't clear! :-/

I have a utopian vision, it's different from someone else's utopian vision, and it's like ALL utopian visions, highly improbable. But I can let my stance on things inform my voting, and weight issues differently as I see them as being important, right? I mean, is that not what you got out of what I said?

I can see you have a problem with my statement "I ... ignored." but that's more a symptom of my ideal viewpoint, not something I think is likely to happen or insist on. I appreciate the specific isolated things LF has done that might align with my viewpoints, but I cannot separate them from my concerns about his exploitive and sexist practices, which I weigh very, very highly. And I don't see it as "I weigh these things so highly that it occludes free speech", I think I can put a great importance on them and still be a fan of freedom of speech and critique practices and businesses I find problematic and exploitive, and allow that to inform my voting decisions.

Phew. I am sorry I keep commenting but it seemed like you wanted me to defend my statements. And now I'm all preoccupied about it. I do value your thoughts and I appreciate you challenging me to be more thorough and explain.